Plan comparison: Gunnar (Plan A) vs Luca (Plan B), May 27 to June 5, 2026 — v2

Athlete: Sidney McGill
Review date: 2026-05-27
Reviewer role: independent, neutral comparative analyst
Window under review: 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05 inclusive
Primary deliverable: evidence-based comparison and a justified verdict
Supersedes: athlete/context/2026-05-27-plan-comparison-gunnar-vs-luca-may-27-to-jun-05.md (v1). The earlier report flagged a three-layer internal inconsistency in Luca's plan. The dated calendar files have since been reconciled, and that finding no longer applies. Triangulated against the independent review at athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-gunnar-vs-luca-plan-review.md, which reaches a directionally similar verdict.

What is different in v2

Luca's dated athlete/calendar/ files for May 28, May 29, and May 30 have been rewritten and now match the conservative, symptom-aware coaching position. The earlier conflict between the dated calendar files (then aggressive) and the rolling-3-day or rolling-7-day (then conservative) is resolved. The dated calendar files are now the single source of truth for Plan B and are internally consistent.
Plan B is treated as an internal planning artifact, not as published TrainingPeaks content. Luca has not published these workouts to the live TP calendar. The dated calendar files are the documents Coach Luca would use as the basis to create the corresponding TP activities if and when authorized by the operator.
Rolling files (rolling-3-day, rolling-7-day, rolling-3-week) are de-emphasized. They are used only for higher-level block intent. The dated calendar files carry the day-level prescription, structure, and per-session rationale.
A separate independent review (2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-gunnar-vs-luca-plan-review.md) has been read and triangulated. That review used a slightly older snapshot of Luca's dated calendar files (it still referenced the pre-reconciliation sweet spot and long gravel pressure for May 29 and May 30). Its day-level reasoning is otherwise consistent with this report, and its hybrid recommendation is close to the one below.

Executive verdict

Best-supported plan: a hybrid that is essentially Plan B with two small, well-bounded modifications. Plan B's reconciled dated calendar files are now the closer fit to Sidney's actual condition, the Ghost target, and the longer cyclocross season. Plan A retains a few defensible elements but contains two day-level prescriptions (May 29 heavy strength, May 30 Openers) that should not be executed five and six days after radiating leg pain, plus a June 2 sprint session that is the wrong tool for a Ghost build.

Three sentences:

Plan A (Gunnar, live TP) is a competent general-conditioning week built around three 3-hour endurance rides, two strength days, two short neuromuscular sessions, and clear race-pace fueling notes, but it has no visible flare-aware modification, no sub-threshold or threshold pressure work, no gravel-surface specificity, and no long ride at race duration.
Plan B (Luca, internal calendar files) is now a coherent staged build: a protective front half (May 27 to June 1) that respects the recent SI/back flare, followed by a Ghost-specific back half (June 2 to June 5) that covers threshold, gravel tempo torque on gravel surface, and ceiling support, with explicit per-session rationale and fueling targets.
The hybrid is Plan B end-to-end with one optional stretch on May 31 (2:00 to 2:30 instead of Luca's 1:30 to 2:00, with Gunnar-style 75 to 80 g/hr fueling) and one downward modification on June 5 (replace the full VO2 session with the dated calendar's own contingency of 75 to 90 min easy plus 3 x 1 min openers, or take Gunnar's rest day) if June 4 produces fatigue.

Evidence reviewed

Direct evidence

Live TrainingPeaks workout objects for 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05, in athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-trainingpeaks-workouts.md. Twelve TP items. May 27 has completed metrics; the rest are planned.
Luca's dated calendar files for 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05, in athlete/calendar/.
The independent third-party comparative review at athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-gunnar-vs-luca-plan-review.md.
Athlete settings, profile, season goals, race calendar, travel schedule.
Power-zone reference.
Daily logs for May 25, May 26, and May 27 (SI/back flare, ride evidence, and same-day pivot).

Supporting evidence, low emphasis

athlete/rolling-3-day.md, athlete/rolling-7-day.md, and athlete/rolling-3-week.md. Used for block-level intent only. Where they differ from the dated calendar files, the dated calendar files are authoritative.

Prior reviews of Gunnar's coaching

athlete/context/trainingpeaks-coach-planning-review-2026-04-11-to-2026-04-24.md and athlete/context/2026-04-21-gunnar-trainingpeaks-planning-review-apr-11-to-24.md. Used to read the May 27 to June 5 Gunnar plan against the April pattern.

Evidence gaps

Planned TSS, planned IF, and structured-workout payloads are still absent for most Gunnar items. Only May 30 Openers has a planned TSS (81.8) and IF (64%) plus a structured payload.
No coach comments on Gunnar's bike sessions. The only coach comments are the recurring "No plyo jumps today" line on the May 29 and June 3 Strength Sidney sessions, which was also the comment on the April 17 strength session, suggesting it may be a template default rather than a same-day flare modification.
No completed metrics for any session past May 27.
No HRV, sleep, or wellness data in this window.

What Gunnar appears to be doing

Direct evidence

Gunnar's live TP plan, day by day:

May 27: 3.0HR Endurance, completed 3:10:09, 83.5 km, average HR 137, hrIF 0.60, hrTSS 128, 838 m climb, description "80g/hr, No gogo squeeze/clif bars, Drink mix/gel (as you would in a race)"
May 28: Rest
May 29: Strength Sidney 1:00 with heavy squat 3 x 4-5, heavy split squat 3 x 4-5, plyo jumps cancelled by "No plyo jumps today" comment, core circuit, ankle proprioception; plus Active Recovery 1:00 "Easy ride"
May 30: Openers, 2:00, planned TSS 81.8, planned IF 0.64, structured with three sets of 6 bursts each at 110-130%, 110-140%, and 110-150% FTP with very short recoveries
May 31: 3.0HR Endurance, description "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr"
June 1: Active Recovery 1:00 "Easy ride"
June 2: ZIPP 2:00, description "12X15s All out sprints spaced through the ride. Maximum quality. I want to see your max power"
June 3: Strength Sidney 1:00 (same heavy template, same "No plyo jumps today"); plus 2.0HR Endurance
June 4: 3.0HR Endurance, description "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr"
June 5: Rest

Strong inference

Gunnar's likely intent:

General conditioning rather than Ghost specificity. Three 3-hour endurance rides anchor the week. No tempo, no sweet spot, no threshold, no sub-threshold pressure, no gravel-surface session.
Neuromuscular sharpness preserved. Openers (May 30) and ZIPP (June 2) are explicit high-end recruitment work, not metabolic stress.
Strength retention in the week, not periodized away. Two strength sessions in 10 days, both using the same template, both heavy.
Race fueling rehearsed on the long rides. "80 g/hr, no gogo squeeze/clif bars, drink mix/gel as in a race" is the strongest Ghost-relevant single line in either plan.
Real rest days as fatigue management. Two true rest days (May 28 and June 5) plus active recovery on May 29 evening and June 1.

What Gunnar appears to believe about Sidney's readiness

He appears to be coaching her as a healthy elite rider in a normal build week. The only flare-aware modification visible in any TP object is the "No plyo jumps today" line, which is the same recurring template note that was present in the April 17 strength session. It is unsafe to assume this is a flare-specific intervention.

Two open questions follow from that, and they are the same questions flagged in v1 and in the independent review:

Did Gunnar receive the May 25 SI/back flare report? If yes, his lack of modification is a coaching judgment that should be contested. If no, this is a communication failure between Luca and Gunnar that should be fixed.
Is Gunnar building toward Ghost or coaching the broader cyclocross season as the primary target? The session shapes are consistent with either reading, but they are not consistent with a focused Ghost build in this window.

Plan character

This is competent individualized coaching with a general-conditioning bias, not generic filler and not a deeply expressed race-specific gravel block. It is more assertive than the April 11 to 24 window because of the directive ZIPP coach voice ("I want to see your max power") and the more athlete-shaped sprint structure on May 30. It is still short of an elite Ghost-specific build because the middle of the intensity curve and the gravel-surface specificity are absent.

What Luca appears to be doing

Direct evidence

Luca's reconciled dated calendar files, day by day:

May 27: Easy endurance back-check ride 1:00 to 1:15, Z1 to Z2, plus 15 to 20 min unloaded movement reset only; no loaded strength
May 28: Recovery day, optional 30 to 45 min very easy spin only if completely symptom-stable; no gym
May 29: Easy endurance reset 1:00 to 1:30, Z1 to low Z2, optional 4 x 1 min cadence lifts at 95 to 105 rpm only if the ride feels better as it goes; no loaded strength, no sweet spot, no torque
May 30: Controlled endurance progression 2:00 to 2:45 on road or smooth gravel, mostly 65 to 75% FTP, optional 4 to 6 x 1 min cadence lifts only if Thursday and Friday were both clean; no pressure blocks, no openers
May 31: Recovery endurance with cadence resets, 1:30 to 2:00 at 60 to 72% FTP, structured warm-up plus 6 x 45 sec cadence resets plus cool-down
June 1: Recovery day off-bike, optional 15 to 20 min movement reset
June 2: Threshold with 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45, with explicit fueling at 75 to 90 g/hr and 600 to 800 mg sodium per hour; contingency to reduce to 2 x 16-18 min if Saturday created lingering fatigue
June 3: Endurance ride 2:00 to 2:15 with 4 x 1 min high-cadence drills, plus Strength maintenance 0:25 to 0:30 with trap bar hinge 2 x 4 at 60-70% 1RM or RPE 6-7, step-up or split squat 2 x 5 each side at RPE 6-7, side plank, calf raise
June 4: Gravel tempo torque 2:45 to 3:00 with 3 x 20 min at 82 to 88% FTP on gravel or mixed terrain, mostly seated 60-75 rpm, fueling at 75 to 90 g/hr, explicit contingency to raise cadence and remove torque if back tightens
June 5: VO2 ceiling support 1:45 to 2:00 with 5 x 3 min at 112 to 118% FTP, contingency to replace with 75 to 90 min easy plus 3 x 1 min openers if Thursday created fatigue

Strong inference

Luca's likely intent:

Staged return-to-load through the front half, with each day's prescription explicitly absorbing the May 27 evidence and the recent flare.
Ghost specificity through the back half built on three pillars: sustained threshold pressure (June 2), gravel-surface sub-threshold torque (June 4), and ceiling support (June 5).
Strength is light and event-appropriate, with the only loaded gym session being a compact maintenance lift on June 3 and an explicit "skip loaded hinge if back is irritated" constraint.
Fueling rehearsal scaled to session demand, from 30 to 45 g/hr on the back-check ride up to 75 to 90 g/hr on key threshold and gravel days.
Decision gates embedded in nearly every day: contingency reductions or replacements when symptoms return, fatigue accumulates, or terrain is unsafe.

What Luca appears to believe about Sidney's readiness

That she is past the peak of the flare but not yet cleared for force-based or opener-style work in the front half of the week, and that the back half can become genuinely Ghost-specific only if the front half stays clean. The reconciled May 28, May 29, and May 30 files now state this directly in their Reasoning sections.

Plan character

This is race-specific build coaching with strong written rationale and explicit clinical guardrails. Each session has Objective, Goal, Reasoning, Workout plan, Structured workout, Fueling, Constraints, and Notes. The structured workout payloads exist for every key day. The per-day Reasoning fields read as coherent and event-targeted (for example, June 4: "Ghost will not reward laboratory-smooth road power alone. Sidney needs the ability to hold pressure when the surface changes, traction varies, and posture fatigue accumulates").

The plan has not been published to the live TP calendar. It exists as the planning artifact that would feed TP creation if and when the operator authorizes it. That is a real-world risk in itself: a thoughtful internal plan that does not reach the athlete's executable TP calendar is a plan that does not influence what Sidney actually does on the bike.

Day-by-day comparison, May 27 to June 5

2026-05-27 (Wednesday) — already executed against Plan A

Gunnar (live TP): 3.0HR Endurance. Completed 3:10:09, 83.5 km, hrIF 0.60, hrTSS 128, 137 average HR, 838 m climb. Race-pace fueling note. Direct evidence.
Luca (calendar): Easy endurance back-check ride 1:00 to 1:15 plus unloaded movement reset only. Symptom-led aerobic continuity. Direct evidence.
Key contrast: Gunnar prescribed a normal endurance day. Luca prescribed a clinically protective day half the duration.
Risk and benefit: Sidney executed Gunnar's plan and produced useful evidence that aerobic riding is tolerable at hrIF 0.60. The morning gym circuit Sidney added independently was the higher-risk element on this day, not the bike work. Luca's prescription was the safer prior; Gunnar's outcome was not the wrong result, but it was a meaningfully larger load than Luca's plan anticipated.
Preferred option for that day: Luca's prescription was the better pre-session decision standard given the symptom history. The completed Gunnar outcome happened to land cleanly.

2026-05-28 (Thursday) — agreement, both coaches converge

Gunnar (live TP): Rest. No duration, no description.
Luca (calendar): Recovery day, optional 30 to 45 min very easy spin only if completely symptom-stable. Default is full rest.
Key contrast: Both coaches default to rest. Luca's prescription is slightly more athlete-shaped (it explicitly absorbs the larger-than-planned May 27 ride). Gunnar's rest is a flat default.
Risk and benefit: Both are appropriate. Luca's optional easy spin is acceptable; it is not a hidden load.
Preferred option for that day: Either coach. Equivalent in effect.

2026-05-29 (Friday) — sharp disagreement on strength

Gunnar (live TP): Strength Sidney 1:00 with heavy squat 3 x 4-5, heavy split squat 3 x 4-5, plyo jumps cancelled by "No plyo jumps today" comment, core work; plus Active Recovery 1:00 easy ride.
Luca (calendar): Easy endurance reset 1:00 to 1:30 only. No loaded strength, no plyometrics, no max lifting, no trunk-loading gym work. Optional cadence lifts only if the ride feels better as it goes.
Key contrast: Gunnar adds mechanical force production through the hip and spine four days after radiating leg pain. Luca explicitly removes all loaded strength and force production for the same reason.
Risk and benefit: Heavy bilateral and split-squat patterns at 3 x 4-5 reps produce some of the largest pelvic and SI-joint compressive loads available in a standard strength session. "No plyo jumps today" reduces the impact load but does not remove the static load. The mechanical risk relative to recent radiating symptoms is the single largest day-level concern in Gunnar's plan. Luca's easy endurance reset is low-cost and produces no force production above riding load.
Preferred option for that day: Luca, decisively. Gunnar's heavy strength template is not appropriate at this point in the recovery arc.

2026-05-30 (Saturday) — sharp disagreement on neuromuscular load

Gunnar (live TP): Openers, 2:00, planned TSS 81.8, IF 0.64. Structured: 20 min warm-up plus 4 x 1 min ramp-ups plus 5 min recovery, then 6 x (30 sec at 110-130% FTP + 15 sec recovery), 15 min recovery, then 6 x (30 sec at 110-140% + 30 sec recovery), 20 min recovery, then 6 x (20 sec at 110-150% + 40 sec recovery), then 39:30 cool-down. Race-pace fueling note.
Luca (calendar): Controlled endurance progression 2:00 to 2:45 on road or smooth gravel, mostly 65 to 75% FTP. Optional 4 to 6 x 1 min cadence lifts only if Thursday and Friday were both clean. Explicit constraints: no opener bursts, no 110-150% efforts, no seated torque, no racing mentality. Fueling 60 to 80 g/hr.
Key contrast: Gunnar prescribes sprint-pattern force production at 110 to 150% FTP, which typically involves out-of-saddle effort, hip extension under high torque, and trunk bracing. Luca prescribes endurance duration extension with no neuromuscular violence.
Risk and benefit: Gunnar's session is the highest-risk individual day in either plan for the SI joint and back. The total session cost is moderate (planned TSS 81.8) but the load distribution is concentrated in high-force bursts. Luca's session adds duration in a low-risk modality and provides useful aerobic and fueling evidence.
Preferred option for that day: Luca, decisively.

2026-05-31 (Sunday) — disagreement on duration and absorption

Gunnar (live TP): 3.0HR Endurance, with description "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr."
Luca (calendar): Recovery endurance with cadence resets, 1:30 to 2:00 at 60 to 72% FTP, structured with 6 x 45 sec cadence resets only if legs improve through the ride. Fueling 30 to 60 g/hr.
Key contrast: Gunnar treats Sunday as a long aerobic ride and permits extension to 4 hours. Luca treats Sunday as a recovery absorption day.
Risk and benefit: Gunnar's duration is more useful for aerobic depth and fueling rehearsal if Saturday was held to endurance. Gunnar's "3-4 if you feel good" instruction is permissive and can drift upward in a rider known to add load when she feels decent. Luca's 1:30 to 2:00 is genuinely absorption-oriented and is appropriate if Saturday was at the top of its range (2:45).
Preferred option for that day: Modified Luca. Stretch to 2:00 to 2:30 with explicit fueling at 75 to 80 g/hr (Gunnar's number). Avoid Gunnar's open-ended "3-4 if you feel good" framing.

2026-06-01 (Monday) — agreement, both coaches converge on recovery

Gunnar (live TP): Active Recovery 1:00, description "Easy ride."
Luca (calendar): Recovery day off-bike, optional 15 to 20 min movement reset.
Key contrast: Gunnar leaves a 1-hour bike door open. Luca defaults to off-bike. The same April pattern issue applies: "Easy ride" without a power or duration cap can drift, as the April 18 file (1.48 hours, IF 0.59, TSS 57.83) showed.
Risk and benefit: Both options are acceptable. Luca's off-bike default is the safer prescription with the back still in the picture; the optional short spin is reasonable if symptoms are clean.
Preferred option for that day: Luca, with the optional spin allowed only if it stays under 45 min and below hrIF 0.6.

2026-06-02 (Tuesday) — clear philosophical difference

Gunnar (live TP): ZIPP, 2:00, description "12X15s All out sprints spaced through the ride. Maximum quality. I want to see your max power."
Luca (calendar): Threshold with 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45. Structured warm-up 40 min plus 2 x (22 min threshold + 9 min recovery) plus 35 min endurance plus 10 min cool-down. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr and 600 to 800 mg sodium per hour. Contingency to reduce to 2 x 16-18 min.
Key contrast: Gunnar prescribes all-out sprints. Luca prescribes the longest threshold reps in either plan.
Risk and benefit: Gunnar's ZIPP develops top-end power and neuromuscular recruitment. For Ghost, top-end power is needed only to respond to surges, and 12 x 15 sec sprints will not improve the capacity to hold 82 to 88% FTP for hours on gravel. Gunnar's session is also mechanically loaded for the back due to out-of-saddle sprint position. Luca's threshold directly builds the sustained-pressure capacity Ghost requires.
Preferred option for that day: Luca, with the dated calendar's own contingency in force. Execute 2 x 22 min only if May 30 and May 31 produced no symptom return.

2026-06-03 (Wednesday) — agreement on shape, sharp disagreement on strength dose

Gunnar (live TP): Strength Sidney 1:00 (same heavy template as May 29) plus 2.0HR Endurance.
Luca (calendar): Endurance ride 2:00 to 2:15 with 4 x 1 min high-cadence drills, plus Strength maintenance 0:25 to 0:30 (trap bar hinge 2 x 4 at 60-70% 1RM or RPE 6-7, step-up or split squat 2 x 5 each side at RPE 6-7, side plank, calf raise).
Key contrast: Both coaches pair endurance with strength on Wednesday. Gunnar's strength template is heavy. Luca's is a 25 to 30 minute maintenance lift explicitly designed to "leave the gym feeling sharper, not loaded."
Risk and benefit: Gunnar's heavy template restored midweek is overload for a build week that already includes a Tuesday key day and a Thursday key day. The same SI-loading concern from May 29 applies. Luca's maintenance lift is appropriately scaled to the build phase.
Preferred option for that day: Luca.

2026-06-04 (Thursday) — Ghost-specific gold standard vs general aerobic

Gunnar (live TP): 3.0HR Endurance, "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr."
Luca (calendar): Gravel tempo torque 2:45 to 3:00 with 3 x 20 min at 82 to 88% FTP, mostly seated 60-75 rpm where terrain allows, on gravel or mixed terrain. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr, race bottle concentration. Contingency to raise cadence and remove torque if back tightens.
Key contrast: Gunnar prescribes a long aerobic ride. Luca prescribes the single most Ghost-specific session in either plan: sub-threshold sustained pressure on gravel surface with race-pace fueling.
Risk and benefit: Gunnar's session is safe and aerobic but does not rehearse Ghost. Luca's session is the closest match in the window to race-day demand. The low-cadence torque component is the highest-back-risk element in Luca's back half; the dated calendar's own contingency raises cadence and removes torque if back tightens.
Preferred option for that day: Luca, with the dated calendar's contingency in force. This is the strongest individual session in either plan for Ghost specificity.

2026-06-05 (Friday) — taper-style rest vs ceiling support

Gunnar (live TP): Rest.
Luca (calendar): VO2 ceiling support 1:45 to 2:00 with 5 x 3 min at 112 to 118% FTP. Contingency to replace with 75 to 90 min easy plus 3 x 1 min openers only if Thursday created fatigue.
Key contrast: Gunnar takes a true rest day. Luca adds a high-end ceiling stimulus.
Risk and benefit: Luca's ceiling work is event-relevant in principle but adds further density to a Tuesday-Thursday key-day week. Gunnar's rest is the simpler fatigue-management call. Luca's own contingency, which steps down to easy plus openers, captures the right middle ground.
Preferred option for that day: Luca's contingency version (75 to 90 min easy plus 3 x 1 min openers) unless Thursday was unusually clean, in which case the full VO2 session is acceptable. If Thursday created any fatigue, Gunnar's rest day is also a defensible alternative.

Comparative strengths and weaknesses

Plan A (Gunnar) strengths

Strong race-fueling instruction across all long rides ("80 g/hr," "No gogo squeeze/clif bars," "Drink mix/gel as in a race"). This is the single best Ghost-relevant coaching language in either plan.
Explicit aerobic volume backbone with three planned 3-hour rides.
One strong directive coach voice in the ZIPP description.
Recovery anchors on May 28 and June 5 are unambiguous true rest days.
Strength is integrated (full session template, not generic).
Plan reads as more athlete-shaped than the April pattern (Sidney-named strength title, sprint sessions with named structure, "as you would in a race" fueling language).
Lower total metabolic density than a full Ghost-specific build, which may be useful if the broader limiter is post-disruption deconditioning rather than acute fitness gap.

Plan A (Gunnar) weaknesses

No visible SI/back flare modification beyond a recurring template "No plyo jumps today" comment. That is the most consequential weakness of the plan.
Heavy squat 3 x 4-5 and heavy split squat 3 x 4-5 prescribed on May 29 and again on June 3.
Openers session on May 30 includes 6 x 30 sec at 110-130%, 6 x 30 sec at 110-140%, and 6 x 20 sec at 110-150%, with the third set escalating force production six days after the first symptom-free ride.
ZIPP session on June 2 is similarly aggressive in neuromuscular load and is not Ghost-relevant.
No tempo, no sweet spot, no threshold, no sub-threshold sustained pressure work, and no long-gravel-pressure rehearsal in the entire 10-day window.
No gravel-surface session of any kind visible.
Longest ride is 3:00, with permissive extension to 4 via "3-4 if you feel good." This is under what is needed to rehearse a 4:35 race.
Active Recovery prescriptions ("Easy ride") are permissive enough to drift, consistent with the April pattern.
Most workouts lack planned TSS, planned IF, and structured payloads, which makes the prescription less precise and less auditable.
No coach comments on any of the bike sessions.

Plan B (Luca) strengths

Reconciled and internally consistent. The dated calendar files for May 28, 29, and 30 now match the conservative, symptom-aware coaching position. The prior internal inconsistency is resolved.
Explicit per-session rationale in every dated calendar file (Objective, Goal, Reasoning, Workout plan, Structured workout, Fueling, Constraints, Notes).
Structured workout payloads exist for every key day.
Strong Ghost specificity in the back half: threshold extension (June 2), gravel tempo torque on gravel (June 4), and ceiling support (June 5).
Fueling targets scaled by session, from 30 to 45 g/hr on the back-check ride to 75 to 90 g/hr on key days.
Decision gates and contingencies embedded ("If Thursday is calm," "If gravel is unsafe," "If back is irritated," "If Saturday created lingering fatigue").
Strength is event-appropriate: a single maintenance lift on June 3 with explicit "skip loaded hinge if back is irritated" guardrail.

Plan B (Luca) weaknesses

Not published to the live TP calendar. The athlete executes from TP, not from the workspace calendar files. A coherent internal plan that does not become Sidney's executable schedule is at risk of not influencing actual training. This is the single largest practical weakness.
The back half (June 2 to June 5) is dense even with contingencies. A threshold key day, an endurance plus maintenance strength day, a gravel torque key day, and a VO2 day inside four consecutive days requires every contingency to work as designed. If the front half runs cleanly, this is correct; if anything from the front half drifts, the back half compresses.
The June 4 low-cadence seated torque (60 to 75 rpm) is the highest-back-risk session in the back half. The dated calendar's contingency raises cadence and removes torque if symptoms return, which is the right gate, but the modality is still a real concern.
No directive coach voice equivalent to Gunnar's "I want to see your max power" line. The Luca plan is content-rich but voice-neutral.

Risk assessment

Plan A downside risk

Highest acute SI and back risk in the first week, concentrated on May 29 heavy strength, May 30 Openers, and June 2 ZIPP and June 3 heavy strength. Two heavy strength days and two sprint days inside ten days, with no visible flare modification, is the largest aggregation of high-force-production work in either plan.
Highest under-specification risk for Ghost. Ten days with no sustained-pressure work and no gravel-surface session leaves Sidney materially under-prepared in event-specific terms.
Worst-case scenario: a re-aggravation of the SI/back flare during May 29 or May 30, costing two to four weeks of training and damaging the Ghost build.

Plan B downside risk

Highest cumulative-density risk in the back half. Four high-cost days inside four consecutive days (Tuesday threshold, Wednesday endurance plus strength, Thursday gravel torque, Friday VO2) is a real build-week stack. Every contingency must work.
Lower acute SI risk than Plan A. The June 4 seated torque is the only meaningfully back-loading session, and the dated calendar has an explicit contingency for it.
Highest execution risk because the plan lives in workspace files and not in TP. If Luca's plan is not published and Sidney follows Gunnar's TP calendar by default, Plan B's protective front half does not actually protect anything.
Worst-case scenario: cumulative fatigue across June 2 to June 5 plus a back response to the gravel torque on June 4 that compromises the planned June 6 long simulation.

Which plan has the higher downside risk overall

For mechanical and acute SI risk in the next 48 to 72 hours, Plan A is the sharper hazard. Heavy strength on May 29 and Openers on May 30 are the most likely triggers in either plan.
For cumulative training-load and block-density risk across the full window if executed in full, Plan B's back half is the higher density.
For race-outcome risk against the Ghost target if executed in full, Plan A is the higher risk because it does not build the event-specific durability Sidney needs to race for the win at Cochrane.

The asymmetry favors Plan B. Plan B's risks are containable by its own contingencies. Plan A's risks are concentrated on specific days where the modality itself is wrong.

Best-supported plan

Plan B with two small modifications, treated as a hybrid only because of those modifications.

This is a shift from v1. In v1, the dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 were the pre-flare aggressive prescriptions, and the recommendation was to fall back on the rolling-3-day for the front half. The dated calendar files have since been reconciled, and the front half no longer needs to be overridden from a separate planning artifact. Plan B as written in the dated calendar files is now the closer fit to the athlete's condition and the Ghost target.

The two modifications are small:

May 31: stretch Luca's 1:30 to 2:00 to 2:00 to 2:30, with explicit fueling at 75 to 80 g/hr borrowed from Gunnar's instruction. This preserves a real fueling rehearsal on a still-fragile back without taking the open-ended "3-4 if you feel good" risk.
June 5: default to Luca's own contingency (75 to 90 min easy plus 3 x 1 min openers) rather than the full 5 x 3 min VO2 session. If June 4 was unusually clean and Sidney is genuinely fresh, the full VO2 session is acceptable. If June 4 created fatigue, Gunnar's rest day is also a defensible alternative.

The plan against Plan A's specific high-risk days:

May 29 heavy strength: override. Luca's easy endurance reset is the executable session.
May 30 Openers: override. Luca's controlled endurance progression is the executable session.
June 2 ZIPP: override. Luca's threshold 2 x 22 min is the executable session.
June 3 heavy strength: override. Luca's strength maintenance 25 to 30 min is the executable session.
June 4 long endurance: replace. Luca's gravel tempo torque is the executable session, with the dated calendar's own contingency in force.

The plan against Plan A's defensible elements:

May 27 race-pace fueling note: keep. Already executed and validated.
May 28 rest: keep. Both coaches agree.
May 31 long endurance volume idea: borrow, modified to 2:00 to 2:30 with explicit fueling cap.
June 1 active recovery option: allow as alternative to Luca's off-bike default, capped at 45 min.
June 5 rest framing: allow as alternative to Luca's VO2 if June 4 created fatigue.

Hybrid prescription, exact

Hybrid by day

May 27 (Wed): Already executed against Gunnar's plan. 3:10 endurance at hrIF 0.60, 80 g/hr fueling. Track symptom response into Thursday morning. No further action.
May 28 (Thu): Both plans agree. Off bike default, optional 30 to 45 min very easy spin only if completely symptom-stable. No gym. Three to four protein feedings.
May 29 (Fri): Plan B. Easy endurance reset 1:00 to 1:30 in Z1 to low Z2, optional 4 x 1 min cadence lifts at 95 to 105 rpm only if the ride feels better as it goes. No loaded strength. Override Gunnar's heavy Strength Sidney session.
May 30 (Sat): Plan B. Controlled endurance progression 2:00 to 2:45 on road or smooth gravel at 65 to 75% FTP. Optional cadence lifts only if Thursday and Friday were both clean. No opener bursts, no 110-150% efforts, no seated torque. Fueling 60 to 80 g/hr. Override Gunnar's Openers session.
May 31 (Sun): Modified Plan B. Endurance 2:00 to 2:30 at 60 to 70% FTP with explicit fueling at 75 to 80 g/hr. This stretches Luca's 1:30 to 2:00 envelope by 30 minutes and adopts Gunnar's fueling number. No "3-4 if you feel good" open-end.
June 1 (Mon): Plan B. Off bike default, optional 15 to 20 min movement reset. If Sidney wants a short easy spin, cap at 45 min and hrIF below 0.6 (closer to Gunnar's prescription with a tighter cap).
June 2 (Tue): Plan B. Threshold with 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr and 600 to 800 mg sodium per hour. Reduce to 2 x 16-18 min if Saturday or Sunday produced lingering fatigue. Override Gunnar's ZIPP session.
June 3 (Wed): Plan B. Endurance ride 2:00 to 2:15 with 4 x 1 min high-cadence drills. Add Plan B strength maintenance 25 to 30 min (trap bar hinge 2 x 4 at 60-70% 1RM, step-up or split squat 2 x 5 each side at RPE 6-7, side plank, calf raise). Skip loaded hinge if back is irritated. Override Gunnar's heavy Strength Sidney template.
June 4 (Thu): Plan B. Gravel tempo torque 2:45 to 3:00 with 3 x 20 min at 82 to 88% FTP on gravel or mixed terrain, mostly seated 60-75 rpm where terrain allows. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr at race bottle concentration. Raise cadence and remove torque if back tightens. Override Gunnar's 3:00 endurance ride. This is the most Ghost-specific session in either plan and must be executed.
June 5 (Fri): Modified Plan B. Default to the dated calendar's contingency: 75 to 90 min easy endurance plus 3 x 1 min openers only, fueled normally. If June 4 was unusually clean, the full Plan B VO2 5 x 3 min at 112 to 118% FTP is acceptable. If June 4 created fatigue, Gunnar's rest day is the safer fallback.

Operational requirement

The hybrid plan must be published to Sidney's live TP calendar to influence what she actually does. The single largest execution risk on Plan B as a paper plan is that Sidney's live TP shows Gunnar's heavy strength on May 29 and Openers on May 30 while Plan B sits in the workspace calendar files. If the operator does not authorize Luca to publish Plan B to TP, or if Gunnar is not informed of the SI/back flare and asked to revise the live plan, the protective intent of Plan B does not reach the executable layer. Whichever coach holds the executable TP calendar must hold the modified prescription. This is a coordination question between the operator and Gunnar, not a coaching question between Gunnar and Luca.

Direct answers to the operator's primary questions

What is Gunnar likely trying to do this week? Build a competent general-conditioning week with aerobic volume, real rest, retained strength, and short neuromuscular work. Strong inference from the structured workouts and descriptions.
What is Luca likely trying to do this week? Stage a return-to-load through the front half that respects the recent SI/back flare, then execute a Ghost-specific build through the back half with threshold, gravel tempo torque, and ceiling support. Direct evidence from the reconciled dated calendar files.
Day-by-day comparison: see section above.
Which plan is more aligned with Sidney's actual short-term condition entering the week? Plan B. The reconciled dated calendar files explicitly address the flare. Plan A does not.
Which plan is more aligned with the near-term Ghost of the Gravel objective? Plan B. The back half (June 2 to June 5) is the only Ghost-specific build in either plan.
Which plan better protects the larger cyclocross season? Plan B. The acute-injury risk profile of Plan A's May 29 heavy strength and May 30 Openers is the largest single threat to the September cyclocross campaign in either plan.
Which plan is better justified by physiology, recovery logic, and sequencing? Plan B. Every session has an explicit Reasoning field and a contingency. Plan A has almost no written rationale in the TP layer.
Which plan carries the higher downside risk? Plan A as written, primarily through May 29 heavy strength and May 30 Openers. Plan B's downside is cumulative density in the back half, which its own contingencies are designed to manage.
What does Gunnar appear to believe about Sidney's readiness? That she is a healthy elite rider ready for a normal build week with sprint emphasis. He appears not to have incorporated the May 25 SI/back flare into the plan.
What does Luca appear to believe about Sidney's readiness? That the flare is past peak but not resolved, that Wednesday's actual ride was higher load than planned, and that the next 24 to 72 hours of symptom response determine whether the back half of the block can be Ghost-specific.
If Gunnar's written rationale is sparse, what do the session designs and weekly sequencing imply? A coach prioritizing power-profile development (sprints), aerobic depth (long endurance), and force transfer (heavy strength), with race fueling embedded but without race-specific sustained-pressure or gravel-surface work.
If Luca's rationale is explicit in the dated calendar files, how convincing is that rationale relative to the athlete context and the intended race outcome? Convincing. The per-session Reasoning fields map directly to Ghost's race demands and to the athlete's clinical context. The main remaining limitation is execution: the plan is not on the live TP calendar.

Coach-style observations

Gunnar's plan in this window is a real plan, not random sessions. It expresses a coherent general-conditioning model: aerobic backbone, real rest, retained strength, retained neuromuscular sharpness, race-pace fueling, and minimal threshold density. The model is defensible for a rider in post-disruption rebuild who is targeting the broader cyclocross season as the priority. The model is not the right model for a rider with a fresh SI/back flare and a B-priority gravel race four weeks out.

Luca's reconciled plan is the planning artifact that should be reaching Sidney's TP calendar. It is more written-down than Gunnar's, more athlete-specific than Gunnar's, and more event-specific than Gunnar's. It has resolved the internal inconsistency that the previous version of this report flagged. The remaining risk is operational: a plan that does not become Sidney's executable schedule is a plan that does not run her training.

Both coaches show real coaching judgment, just on different problems. Gunnar appears to be solving for general athletic preservation across a longer season. Luca is solving for a specific event with a specific clinical context. The operator's framing makes Ghost a real near-term target, which makes Luca's framing closer to the operator's stated priority for this window.

Key uncertainties and missing evidence

Whether Gunnar received the May 25 SI/back flare report. If yes, his lack of modification is a coaching judgment that should be contested. If no, this is a communication failure between Luca and Gunnar.
Whether the May 27 morning gym circuit Sidney added on her own produced any later symptom or stayed quiet. The May 27 daily log raises this question; no later evidence resolves it in the workspace.
Planned TSS, IF, and structured payloads for most of Gunnar's bike sessions are still absent in the TP objects. Load estimation for Gunnar's week is directional, not precise.
Completed metrics are present only for May 27. No completed evidence for any later session because they have not happened yet.
HRV, sleep, RPE, and other wellness markers from Sidney are absent for this window. Symptom-led plans depend on those signals; without them, the contingencies depend on athlete self-reporting.
Whether Plan B will be published to the live TP calendar. This is the single most consequential uncertainty in this analysis. A correctly designed plan that does not reach the executable layer does not change Sidney's training.

Confidence

Plan A assessment confidence: high. Direct evidence available for every day. Coach-intent inference is supported by multiple structural cues and the prior April pattern.
Plan B assessment confidence: high. Direct evidence across reconciled dated calendar files with explicit per-session rationale.
Comparison confidence: high. The two plans now differ cleanly at the day level. The internal inconsistency that previously complicated the comparison is resolved.
Verdict confidence: high within the available evidence. The hybrid prescription is robust to all plausible Sidney symptom outcomes except a worsening flare, in which case both plans collapse to rest and clinical assessment.
Triangulation: the independent review at athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-gunnar-vs-luca-plan-review.md reaches a directionally similar verdict (hybrid, leaning to Luca's Ghost-specific logic with Gunnar's recovery spacing). Its day-level reads were based on the pre-reconciliation Luca calendar files; the current dated calendar files have absorbed most of the modifications that review would have recommended.

Last updated on 2026-05-27